View Single Post
11-04-2012, 07:58 PM
Czech Your Math
Registered User
Czech Your Math's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 4,056
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Ok, you go ahead and show me how a decrease in PP goals that is even greater than the decrease of total goals will increase the % of goals scored by top tier players in relation to lower tier players.

You know what it actually means?
It means that the top tier players % of total even strength goals is even higher than than their % of total goals.
Or to put it better, their decrease over the years, compared to the lower tiers, in even strength goals scored is even less than their decrease in total goals scored.
That's what it means.

Seriously, unlike the European factor or addition of top players vs expansion arguments, the facts and data are pretty black and white in regards to the PP for cause argument.
Yes, it would seem that PP goals would not be a cause for scoring to comparatively increase for the top tiers in 2012 vs. 1985. There are numerous other factors at work. I believe the top 30 in adjusted scoring in 2012 had a slightly lower avg. than the top 21 in 1985. If so, then that would probably be due to the decrease in PP. In any case, we're never going to have a perfect way of comparing players across different seasons in terms of difficulty of their level of production. This is especially true for the very top playes, because there are so few (in some cases no) similar level of players whose production we can study. The best we can do is pick the most similar group of players for each factor identified and see how production changed for that group, and then assume that the specific player would likely change in a similar way. We can compare them to their peers, but must realize that the peer group changes (in quality, depth, etc.) over time. Do you have a fairer way to compare players across seasons?

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote